Vacation post: What’s in a name?

This is a reader-submitted post written as part of the “Come write for OTE (and me)” feature running while Kristi Gustafson, blog moderator and author, is out of the office.

The post is not written by Kristi Gustafson.

Kimberly Ann Reach is the author.

When Kristi first posted about allowing readers to write for ‘On The Edge’ while she is on vacation, the early reaction was pretty much one big, positive, “Yes!”. That is, until Michael Huber from the Times Union commented that authors would need to use their real/legal birth name. All of a sudden there was some grumbling on the thread. This got me thinking what’s in a name, and how the names we go by can change depending on environment.

Truth is, names are important. Imagine trying to read a passionate romance novel by an author named Adolf. Conversely, how much less terrifying would the Fuhrer have been if his name was Mortimer Snerd.

In our daily life, most people tend to go by the name which they were given at birth, or a shorter version of such that is generally associated with that name. Professionally, it seems people are addressed with the more proper, long form of their name. In a close office environment we can have nicknames given to us by coworkers. When we’re with family or friends we may have a plethora of nicknames that have been assigned to us through the years.

People have facebook names, myspace names, blog names, pen names, screen names.. etc. But what is it about using a moniker that allows us to feel more open with our writing?

Anonymity makes it easier to voice our opinions without really putting yourself out there. One person may be concerned with their employers reaction to such writing, while another will simply feel less judged and in turn be able to write with more clarity and without much reservation. In the local ‘blogosphere’ we write in, people may be more critical of others comments based on who is responding, rather than the content of what they’re saying.

We all have names that we prefer or feel are more suitable as a personal description. Some of us with more common names may coin something slightly different as a way of specifying between us and others. Certain names can also provide a certain perception. Some are obvious and some more cryptic. Some are romantic and some more abrasive. A name that I may find attractive can be a turnoff to someone else.

Was Shakespeare onto something when he quoted “..that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet; so Romeo would, were he not romeo call’d”? Me thinks, yes, to a certain extent. Although I can’t help but be partial to my own name (thanks, Mom and Dad).

What are some names that you prefer people call you and how do those name make you feel? What (generally) are some your favorite names and why?

17 Responses

I really don’t have too much a preference in regard to what people choose to call me. I feel I more respond to the tone and direction of the person hollering as to know if they are trying to grab my attention. I do however, not like when people shorten my name and call me the masculine version, since I already don’t like my name, it just further adds to my detest for it. I also don’t like when people mispronounce my name and call me instead a religion or savior. I would love to have a nickname that sticks. Something that feels more appropriate. I have had several nicknames throughout my time and due to the natural flow of life and change of locations, therefore friends, and social circles none of them have carried through or stuck long enough that I was able to identify with it myself and in turn feel comfortable enough to introduce myself as.

I think you’re right on about people using monikers to feel more expressive. But perhaps some people are wary of others relating their expressions and discussions over the internet, to a real live person. Really, with all the advances in technology, it isn’t too hard for people to type in a name and receive information about that person. Perhaps some people want to feel like the masked superhero, or villian.

To be honest, I chose the name “Get Real”, because it adds another insult/argument/opinion/expression to my discussions. It’s also how I feel. The world would be a much better place if some people had a swift reality check. I think that people who are fake with others and themselves, are just lame. I mean, if you can’t be true to others, can you really be true to yourself?

i think this is a great post and concept. i hate being a sarah. and i don’t think i am alone when people certainly became tired of overused and common names. just look at the plethora of different names. it has become so common to use a strange name now that i can identify a suburban white child just by a parker or madison or jameson
overall i think naming is very important and i think thought and meaning put into a name is essential. but i wonder if the trend to have a unique name is turning into the next era of sarahs or jennifers without much though. i mean i just encountered a new baby dorian and the parents had never heard of the vain, soulselling, homoerotic dorian grey.

Good post Kimberly. I go by Sue (professionally), Suzi to family & friends and Mimi to my grandchildren. Years ago, I was involved in ordering, organizing machining and selling a product called shear blades. I was given the nickname of Suzi Shear Blade by my co-workers and some still call me that to this day, although I’ve been out of that business for more than 20 years.

Nice article, Kim, I love to give people nicknames…usually just a short version of their first name, but I like giving descriptive names too that seem to fit their personality. Our office has a nickname for everyone in it, some people have a few they’re not aware of. Some of my friends go by multiple nicknames depending on the crowd they’re with. I have been given a few myself ie: Miss Ellie, Ellie May & “L”. An old friend of mine even calls me Margaret & I call her Betty (not even close to our real names). These were our nickname’s from playing a restaurant game when she was young and they have stuck with us over 20 years…it’s fun and brings back alot of happy memories. Hope to see more articles from you.

Like Leigh, I use my real name here. I’ve nothing to hide…no one wants to steal my identity because they can’t use it to charge up exorbitant amounts of anything, my credit stinks that bad! :D I tell everyone, anyone who wants to steal my identity, go right ahead, just make sure you clean up my credit before giving it back! hahaha

As far as nicknames…I’ve had many over the years. My dad used to call me Dizzy Lizzie…never really knew why and the closest I can guess was my mom was born Elizabeth Sharon-Ann. She didn’t like the name Elizabeth so she dropped it and went by Sharon and left her middle name as Ann. Personally, I love the name Elizabeth and so did my dad so maybe that’s the reason behind that moniker. I’ve had numerous others….ranging from Shorty, because I’m short, to one of my hubby’s favorites, B*tch. Yes, I am one and fully admit to it. :D

My initials growing up were BJ and, being a tomboy, I was often called BJ. You can only imagine the snickers I got in middle and school. Now I’m BM, which my husband also thinks is hilarious. I go by Safety Lady for pretty much obvious reasons – I’m in the safety profession and am affectionally referred to at work as “the Safety Lady.”

I went through all the ubiquitous variations of “Jennifer” until I settled on Jen. Now that I’m, ahem, past the age of 40, it seemed most appropriate.

Interestingly enough, Goose, I shared your moniker when I was in grade school. I was always taller than the other kids, so one boy decided to call me “Goose”. Don’t ask me the logic behind it. He was nine. Go figure.

Most people call me Jen (one “n”, not two!!) and it’s how I’ve ALWAYS introduced myself even though I was raised as a Jenny. I’ve never thought about how odd that is until now… I guess I don’t dislike the name, but only my family and like 2 or 3 others I’m very close to call me Jenny. If anyone else addresses me that way it sounds startling and unnatural.

Kim wrote:
“Anonymity makes it easier to voice our opinions without really putting yourself out there. One person may be concerned with their employers reaction to such writing, while another will simply feel less judged and in turn be able to write with more clarity and without much reservation.”

Perhaps one of the most liberating functions of authorship is the distance provided from the reader by that floating space of consciousness we call text, that distance which Roland Blythe assures us is impossible to transcend. Yet Mr. Foucault, also, has argued along the same lines as Kim, stating that much can be gathered and assumed from the contextual orientation provided by a name, and from the connotations that are dripping from the language that creates names. Each person’s name, when it is not confused with the same name of another individual, serve’s as a beginning in the sense that it is a point of reference- it is a label that allows us to isolate all of the distinct qualities that may be attributed to a particular person, yet it is also a point of entry into an abyss, into all of the meaning that is derivative of a unique existence. A name is an object, an entity separate from the individual, beholden more so to the observer than to the person that it identifies, though from the moment that a name and its owner are brought together they are to one another bound throughout history.

What I am speaking towards is the idea that there is indeed a definitive distance forged by authorship from those readers the author would communicate to- which we might say operates in the same way as ‘personal space,’ which is why Allen Ginsberg equated poetry to an intimate bedroom conversation, because that space allows us a usable separation from the vulnerable fear of each of our identities- each necessarily born from a disillusioning severing of self from external environment thus acknowledging distinct difference from those and that which exists outside of our selves. A name is the pivoting point of that petrifying distinction of self, and it is each of our closest links to that essential, terrifying division. The free space of anonymity shrinks like a shuttering lens, closing around the given name- identity- of each author, and the awareness of this act in turn affects the author’s state of consciousness in such a way that their writing is also directly affected- changed (I am confused, I must apologize … who was it that wrote ‘The Shawshank Redemption’? I am not familiar with their work). Isn’t this in fact the reason why Mr. Huber stressed the importance of properly signified authorship? And as Kim so aptly pointed out and so eloquently mentioned, mightn’t this awareness sabotage the intimate work of a blogger? How sacred is the anonymity of the blogger, and what circumstances may justify the need to trample upon that sacred distance?